1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to security and access control systems and apparatus for check out stations and cash registers used in commerce at the wholesale and retail level.
2. Prior Art
The check out stations which include cash registers of wholesale and retail commercial establishments that are open, to essentially, the public are multi-function stations. The cash register normally included as a part of the check out station is often a complex, multi-function, intelligent machine. The machine is basically a cash register with an alphanumeric key board through which data is entered into the machine. Transactions are calculated and displayed to both the operator and the customer. The machine handles multiple transactions. The type of transaction could be a wholesale or a retail sale, for example. Taxes on the sale are accordingly calculated. The transaction could be a cash, a check, a credit card, a debit card or a line of credit sale, for example, either wholesale or retail. The transaction could be a sale or a return of merchandise purchased for cash return or credit return or exchange of merchandise in kind or some other kind. These and other commercial transactions are handled at multi-function commercial check out stations along with inventory update and record keeping and check cashing. An example of a currently manufactured electronic, multi-function cash register is the ROYAL model 9170 Cash Management System available from Staples, Inc. of Framingham, Mass. This multi-function cash register does automatic tax computation, prints out written receipt identifying the purchase made and price charged, has a dual alphanumeric display with programmable store logo, maintains a two-station alphanumeric journal and has a locking cash draw.
Whether the commercial establishment has a multi-station check out system or a single station check out system, most check out stations have a locking feature which effectively limits access to the multi-functions of the check out stations. The locking feature may be over come by use of the proper key inserted into a lock tumbler in the cash register or may be a code or pin number punched into a key board. But the problem of these key devices is security. Keys, pin numbers, pass words or other codes may be readily stolen and used by unauthorized persons. Further, because the check out station has a great plurality of functions, some of the functions of the system may be unauthorized to certain persons, who have authorized, but limited use of the multi-function machine, use limited to certain specific functions of the machine. Some persons may not have the training or ability to use all the functions of a multi-function machine. On the other hand, some persons may intentionally use unauthorized functions of the machine for dishonest purposes. Other persons may have full authorized use of the machine. The U.S. Pat. No. 5,615,277; issued to Hoffman, teaches a tokenless security system and method for authorizing access to a computer system. Personal identification, using unique biometric sample comparison, integrated into a computer security system is taught. Comparison provides authentication of an individual entitled to access to the computer system. A second coded input by the authorized person indicates whether the act of access is voluntary on the part of the authorized person or if the authorized person is being forced by another person to request access. In the case of voluntary access, unlimited access to the computer is provided. In the case of coerced access, limited access to the computer is provided. Hoffman requires that the individual first be identified as an authorized person or user and then that the authorized user inform the security system whether the access by the user is a voluntary act on the user's part or the user is being coerced or forced by a third part to request access to the computer.
Identification and/or verification of identity using biometric comparison techniques is well known. A few examples of U.S. patents that teach techniques and/or apparatus for biometric comparison for identification and/or personal verification are:
U.S. Pat. No. 3,576,583issued to MillerApril 1971(‘583)U.S. Pat. No. 4,690,554issued to FroelichSeptember 1987(‘554)U.S. Pat. No. 5,073,949issued toDecember 1991(‘949)Takeda et alU.S. Pat. No. 5,815,252issued toSeptember 1998(‘252)Price-FrancisU.S. Pat. No. 6,002,785issued to UcidaDecember 1999(‘785)U.S. Pat. No. 6,028,950issued toFebruary 2000(‘950)MerjanianU.S. Pat. No. 6,148,094issued to KinsellaNovember 2000(‘094)U.S. Pat. No.issued toFebruary 2001(‘318)US6,185,318 B1Jain et alU.S. Pat. No.issued to BradneyMarch 2001(‘264)US6,208,264 B1U.S. Pat. No.issued to BurgerApril 2001(‘439)US6,219,439 B1U.S. Pat. No.issued toJune 2001(‘288)US6,241,288 B1Bergenek et al
Miller, in his '383 patent teaches a personal identification biometric comparison system, compares selected features of the contour or outer dimensions of the fingers of an individual with previous data on identical body parts. Froelich, in his '554 patent teaches a device for comparing a real time finger print image with finger print images already on file. The apparatus includes a pair of self-correcting relay lens systems arranged symmetrically about a common image plane. The '949 patent to Takeda et al teaches a personal verification apparatus that identifies or verifies an individual by the proportional relationship of the joints of the fingers by comparing previously taken and filed data with current data of the same body parts of the same person. The '252 patent to Price-Francis teaches an apparatus and system for verifying that a card held or possessed by a person is owned by that person. One or more of the card owner's finger prints are encoded on the card. The person possessing the card provides his or her finger prints and the encoded finger prints and the prints provided by the person are compared to establish verification. The Ucida '785 patent teaches apparatus for comparing finger print pattern level feature differences for reducing the volume of file data prints for further checking. The Merjanian '950 patent teaches a method and apparatus for guiding a finger of a person on to a platen for reading the finger print on the finger. In one aspect of the invention Merjanian teaches a housing supporting at least two planar surfaces, one of which supports the finger for reading the finger print, the other of which provides a griping surface for holding the housing. In another aspect the housing supports a contoured surface with a guide for guiding a person's finger on to the platen of the reader. Kinsella in the '094 patent teaches a biometric sensor integrated into a computer mouse, the sensor being operated in response to grasping the computer mouse. The biometric sensor system includes a sensor/comparator that senses a selected personal characteristic of the person grasping the computer mouse and compares the personal characteristic with previously obtained and stored personal data of a person. A successful comparison between the real time data and the stored data indicates verification of the user. Continued monitoring of the computer mouse ensures that the same person, previously verified is using the computer mouse. The '318 patent issued to Jain et al teaches a system and method for matching finger print patterns by creating a one dimensional representation of one or more points in a finger print pattern. The one dimensional representations are created by finding corresponding reference points in finger print pattern and generating an index of points which represents the finger print pattern. Indexes of two finger print patterns are compared for matching purposes. This is another way of matching finger print patterns. Bradney et al in patent '264 teaches a personal verification system using the thumb print of a person being interrogated. The thumb print of a person is converted into a coded data and the data is stored on a card. The teaching provides a reader which reads the coded data on the card and reads the thumb print of a person. The card is inserted in the reader and the reader scans the print on the thumb of a person. The reader reads the data on the card and, at the same time, converts the scanned thumb print into a corresponding code. Comparison of the stored, coded data on the card and the real time code data from the scanned reading, identifies that the person whose thumb print is scanned as the person who owns the card. The '439 patent to Burger teaches a biometric authentication system which includes a dual data input reader which reads both stored data and real time data. The stored data consists of physiological data, such as finger print pattern data of a person, stored on a chip disposed in a card. The real time data is data representing a finger print scan of a person, by the reader. The physiological data stored on the chip in the card is compared with a real time finger print scan for verification and identification. Physiological data includes finger print pattern, retina scan, voice sound wave pattern, saliva and other physiological data. Bergenek et al in the '288 patent teaches a finger print identification/verification system using comparison of bit maps generated from a finger print pattern. Geometric configurations in a finger print pattern are recognized and a reference between geometric configurations in the same finger print pattern are mapped out in a bit map. Stored bit maps of finger print patterns are compared with a bit map generated from an input finger print pattern of a person. Identification or verification of a person is made by comparing two bit maps of finger prints.
The above discussed prior art establishes a data base of information on identification and verification of persons by comparing finger print pattern data and other biometric data. However, this prior art does not address the problems that the present invention is designed to solve. The present invention addresses the problem of unauthorized and authorized use of a multi-function wholesale and/or retail commercial establishment check out system and deterring theft from the check out system. It should be apparent to one skilled in the art that the discussed prior art is to be construed within the limitations established by the inventors named in the respective patents and in the claims defining the inventions.